3D Models
3D Print Models
3D Scans
Animation & MoCap
Textures
Materials
Skin Textures
2D Game Assets
Sound Effects
Brushes & Tools
Reference Photos
Stock Images
HDR Images
3ds Max
Maya
Blender
Unreal Engine
Unity
ZBrush
Cinema 4D
LightWave
Marmoset
SketchUp
FBX
DAE
DXF
GLBU.S. copyright office issues new report on AI and copyright
197
https://newsroom.loc.gov/news/copyright-office-releases-part-2-of-artificial-intelligence-report/s/f3959c36-d616-498d-b8f9-67641fd18bab
TLDR:
Write a prompt the default output cannot
have copyright protection.
Alter default output or combine it as part of a larger transformative work and the whole work has copyright protection even if the AI elements within does not.
Example:
Most of the voices and all of the music in this animated cartoon series, I am producing for my young Grandsons, are all AI created.
The 2D puppet animation is my work
Thus youtube will accept my copyright claim and strike you, if you repost it on your channel.
TLDR:
Write a prompt the default output cannot
have copyright protection.
Alter default output or combine it as part of a larger transformative work and the whole work has copyright protection even if the AI elements within does not.
Example:
Most of the voices and all of the music in this animated cartoon series, I am producing for my young Grandsons, are all AI created.
The 2D puppet animation is my work
Thus youtube will accept my copyright claim and strike you, if you repost it on your channel.
! REPORT
Thank you for the link, that was interesting. FWIW I agree with your assessment on the protection of your collective work. Being an accursed Safari user, I cannot view your video. I think AI will be "nerfed" through Civil court (Copyrights, DeepFake, Name Image & Likeness, etc) and government has Obscenity laws (niche at best). IMO the civil cases have a greater chance of generating legislation or forcing product changes based on financial liability.
REPLY
! REPORT
Anabran
Karma: 2,441
Tue, Feb 04Any use of AI that violates current laws
will not impede the development or the
current use of AI for legal purpose.
Example:
it is already a civil violation against Disney/Lucas films for me to make commercial use of a trademarked Character such as “Darth Vader
if I used AI to create it , drew it myself
or modeled and rendered it with Blender or Maya.
No new laws are needed here as the copyright office stated.
As far as Artist trying to sue generative AI out of existence to artificially restore scarcity in the freelance illustration market, they will have to prove individual
violation of their copyright under existing laws and thus far such efforts have and will continue to fail.
This thing is way WAY bigger than freelance Artists having to compete with AI for image making.
Project Stargate makes it clear that the new
Administration considers the U.S.to be in an AI arms race with other competing nation states.
We are in a new era of creative technology..
no going back.
will not impede the development or the
current use of AI for legal purpose.
Example:
it is already a civil violation against Disney/Lucas films for me to make commercial use of a trademarked Character such as “Darth Vader
if I used AI to create it , drew it myself
or modeled and rendered it with Blender or Maya.
No new laws are needed here as the copyright office stated.
As far as Artist trying to sue generative AI out of existence to artificially restore scarcity in the freelance illustration market, they will have to prove individual
violation of their copyright under existing laws and thus far such efforts have and will continue to fail.
This thing is way WAY bigger than freelance Artists having to compete with AI for image making.
Project Stargate makes it clear that the new
Administration considers the U.S.to be in an AI arms race with other competing nation states.
We are in a new era of creative technology..
no going back.
COMIXIANT
Well there's no going back in it's existence, that's very true, but there absolutely needs to be laws governing acceptable use, and those dirty corporates, thieving the livelihood from actual flesh-and-blood artists, then selling that stolen talent to the talentless for profit, most certainly is NOT acceptable use!
Please, don't even try to convince me otherwise. You will fail if you try. And frankly, I've got far more important things to concern myself with right now than a bunch of unaccountable, society-damaging corporate thieves!
Karma: 1,447
Thu, Feb 06Well there's no going back in it's existence, that's very true, but there absolutely needs to be laws governing acceptable use, and those dirty corporates, thieving the livelihood from actual flesh-and-blood artists, then selling that stolen talent to the talentless for profit, most certainly is NOT acceptable use!
Please, don't even try to convince me otherwise. You will fail if you try. And frankly, I've got far more important things to concern myself with right now than a bunch of unaccountable, society-damaging corporate thieves!
Here is, what I listened to last night about that:
REPLY
! REPORT
COMIXIANT
The fact that these desparate corporate morons actually likened A.I. to photography. tells you all you need to know about the shameless lunacy of the corporate filth behind it all. It's a f*cking insult to photographers and cinematographers. Photography and cinematography is all about knowing what makes a good photograph or scene, and having the technical skill and know-how to deliver it.
So intensely in denial (and desparate to divert their crimes against humanity), they don't even realise they just shot themselves in the foot! If using a camera (a machine) makes the photographer any less the copyright owner of the resulting photograph, then perhaps we should remember that every single film that Hollywood ever producd would also be copyrioght free and up for grabs for the same f*cking reason!
Seriously, you'll have to excuse my language, but how exactly do you think they filmed all that stuff - fairy dust and a f*cking wand???
They used "A MACHINE" - it's called a camera (or movie camera in this case)!
LMFAO - like I said in that other thread; A.I. is a legal catastrophe waiting to happen. But the good news is that the ONLY houses being reposessed in order to pay the HUGE legal fees they will hopefully face, are those belonging to those who were unethical enough to participate in one of the largest crimes against humanity known to mankind.
So to anyone out there STILL dumb enough to believe that making use of data stolen from flesh-and-blood artists, then handed or sold to them for their own and the thief's gain is IN ANY WAY ok, then I do believe you have a VERY serious reality check coming your way in the not too distant future!
Seriously peeps, I know I sound like a scratched record, but PLEASE stay away from this A.I. bullshit. The sheer amount of lives detroyed by it and the sheer amount of money to be made by solicitors chasing compensation over it, I think, is pretty much an absolute guarantee that there WILL be consequences for the unethical further down the line.
Karma: 1,447
Sat, Feb 08The fact that these desparate corporate morons actually likened A.I. to photography. tells you all you need to know about the shameless lunacy of the corporate filth behind it all. It's a f*cking insult to photographers and cinematographers. Photography and cinematography is all about knowing what makes a good photograph or scene, and having the technical skill and know-how to deliver it.
So intensely in denial (and desparate to divert their crimes against humanity), they don't even realise they just shot themselves in the foot! If using a camera (a machine) makes the photographer any less the copyright owner of the resulting photograph, then perhaps we should remember that every single film that Hollywood ever producd would also be copyrioght free and up for grabs for the same f*cking reason!
Seriously, you'll have to excuse my language, but how exactly do you think they filmed all that stuff - fairy dust and a f*cking wand???
They used "A MACHINE" - it's called a camera (or movie camera in this case)!
LMFAO - like I said in that other thread; A.I. is a legal catastrophe waiting to happen. But the good news is that the ONLY houses being reposessed in order to pay the HUGE legal fees they will hopefully face, are those belonging to those who were unethical enough to participate in one of the largest crimes against humanity known to mankind.
So to anyone out there STILL dumb enough to believe that making use of data stolen from flesh-and-blood artists, then handed or sold to them for their own and the thief's gain is IN ANY WAY ok, then I do believe you have a VERY serious reality check coming your way in the not too distant future!
Seriously peeps, I know I sound like a scratched record, but PLEASE stay away from this A.I. bullshit. The sheer amount of lives detroyed by it and the sheer amount of money to be made by solicitors chasing compensation over it, I think, is pretty much an absolute guarantee that there WILL be consequences for the unethical further down the line.
Masterstroke
Karma: 3,546
Sun, Feb 09I'm not condemning AI entirely.
AI tools are useful in a working process.
-Having ONE set of expressions for several different 3d characters without having to remodel and resculpt them for every single character again and again, would be a nice thing, where AI could be just helpful.
-Better calculations of lights and cameras for more photo real renders, great.
-Adding micro movements to animations for more realism (which exists) is a great use of AI.
As far as I know, a lot of AI tools are already in the Unreal Engine, that are quite useful
I completly agree on generative AI to be a PITA.
Generative AI is pretty much theft to me.
Write a prompt, select one out of 5 drafts and present yourself as an artist.
W.T.Fog
AI tools are useful in a working process.
-Having ONE set of expressions for several different 3d characters without having to remodel and resculpt them for every single character again and again, would be a nice thing, where AI could be just helpful.
-Better calculations of lights and cameras for more photo real renders, great.
-Adding micro movements to animations for more realism (which exists) is a great use of AI.
As far as I know, a lot of AI tools are already in the Unreal Engine, that are quite useful
I completly agree on generative AI to be a PITA.
Generative AI is pretty much theft to me.
Write a prompt, select one out of 5 drafts and present yourself as an artist.
W.T.Fog
COMIXIANT
I agree with pretty much everything you just said, however all of that stuff is just standard features that could (and should) be added to the sort of software we like to use. It really has nothing to do with what they're referring to as "A.I.".
The very act of calling it "Artificial Intelligence" is already a lie in and of itself, since it is neither "Artificial" nor "intelligent". Fact is it's all very real as can be seen by the damage it's causing to the very fabric of society, and has no intelligence whatoever since in order to be intelligent it would first of all need to be conscious (which it isn't and never will be no matter how much bullshit they try spoon-feeding the increasingly gullible and easily led sheeple out there).
By the way, I just wanted to point out that my statement about "fairy dust and a wand" was not directed at you specifically, but there's no edit button on here and I was unable to delete and repost a corrected version.
It was meant to read "what exactly do they think" - not - "what exactly do you think".
Incredible gallery by the way, very nice and great attention to detail!
Karma: 1,447
Sun, Feb 09I agree with pretty much everything you just said, however all of that stuff is just standard features that could (and should) be added to the sort of software we like to use. It really has nothing to do with what they're referring to as "A.I.".
The very act of calling it "Artificial Intelligence" is already a lie in and of itself, since it is neither "Artificial" nor "intelligent". Fact is it's all very real as can be seen by the damage it's causing to the very fabric of society, and has no intelligence whatoever since in order to be intelligent it would first of all need to be conscious (which it isn't and never will be no matter how much bullshit they try spoon-feeding the increasingly gullible and easily led sheeple out there).
By the way, I just wanted to point out that my statement about "fairy dust and a wand" was not directed at you specifically, but there's no edit button on here and I was unable to delete and repost a corrected version.
It was meant to read "what exactly do they think" - not - "what exactly do you think".
Incredible gallery by the way, very nice and great attention to detail!
